Let Bison Be Bison

Tragically, a baby bison was euthanized in Yellowstone National Park after tourists, thinking the newborn needed help, put the calf in their car and drove to the ranger station. After unsuccessfully trying to reintroduce the baby to the herd, the National Park Service concluded that they lacked resources or options to care for the baby, and the baby was euthanized.

Wildlife and domestic pets are not the same. Wildlife responds differently to human intervention and unwanted touching. They are not domesticated. They abide by the rules of the wild. As such, there are laws that criminalize such interference whether it be a hummingbird (The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918), seals on the beach (The Marine Mammal Act) or United States Fish and Wildlife Rules regarding bison, In other words, the danger to humans notwithstanding, these laws are designed to allow our wildlife to behave naturally, in the wild.

Unfortunately, whether you mean well but are simply ignorant of the issues, determined to torment an animal in order to take a selfie, or just have an irresistible impulse to touch and get a closer look, the result is the same. The animal always suffers harm.

President Obama just declared the bison the Official Mammal of the United States. It is worth it to mention here that in the 1500's an estimated 30-60 million bison lived here. Now, there are about 500,000.

Today, there is 1 less.

Obama to Decide Whether to Expand Military's Animal Cruelty Policy

The Department of Defense is asking President Obama for permission to expand the military's current animal cruelty policy to include abandonment and to also apply to personal pets rather than just those owned by the military. The constant relocation and reassignment of military families has resulted in many pets simply being left behind, abandoned, and unattended. Stars and Stripes is reporting that the problem is so great in  places like Hawaii and Germany that local shelters are reluctant to adopt pets to Americans and/or military families at all.

The military is further concerned that the problem will worsen as United Airlines, the airline contracted to transport military personnel, refuses to permit certain breeds of dogs, such as American Staffordshire Terriers, on their planes, and will not waive this restriction for the Defense Department.

While I fully support holding those who choose to have a pet responsible for caring for that pet and accountable to the authorities for not doing so, I would also suggest that the military drop United Airlines and contract with another carrier so those with "banned" family dogs can travel without the additional heartbreak of the loss of a pet or the expense of funding their own flights on another airline. It seems an unnecessary stressor for those who would otherwise not abandon their pet.

In fact, if all pet lovers chose, in sympathy, to fly with different airlines - maybe we would see an attitude change from United.

The president is expected to decide this spring.

President Obama: Step Away From Our Charity

President Obama claims to not want to solve the nation’s financial crisis on the “backs of the needy”. Yet by cutting allowable contributions to charity, through his new jobs bill, he will do precisely that. Who does President Obama think is reliant upon non-profits if not the “needy”?

The new jobs bill will reduce the percentage of income that donors can write off for charitable gifts and will limit tax breaks for such gifts.

spcaLA officer responding to devastation after Katrina

Government spending on social programs is shrinking, Americans dropping to the poverty level is increasing, unemployment is rising, and disposable income left to donate to a charity is nil.  To reduce philanthropic gifts to the not-for-profit sector is counter-intuitive.  In other words, non-profits are needed now, more than ever.

As a former community organizer, Obama must know that in horrid economic times, philanthropic entities are filling the gaps left by the government and the for-profit sector.  If charities collapse, there will be no relief for those dependent upon our services.  Non-profits are businesses too.  We provide jobs (we are hiring now!), resources, and services that allow a community to thrive.  We are the safety net that cushions the fall when the government and all else fails.

At its inception in 1877, spcaLA was responsible for protecting women, children and animals as they were legally considered property, and as such abused, exploited, overworked, underpaid and discarded.  spcaLA was also incorporated as an spcc (Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children) as we preceded the enactment of child labor laws and social service programs.   In 2011, spcaLA boasts anti-violence programs for at-risk youth, domestic violence programs to assist those who would risk their lives not to leave a pet behind and an elite disaster response unit that travels nationwide to assist animals and their people.  These programs are also essential as there is undisputed evidence that crimes against animals are a predictor and precursor of crimes against humans.  It is us, the non-profit, who works with those troubled teens.  It is our educators who work in the classrooms and provide age-appropriate humane education curricula to teachers who would not otherwise have them.  We are just one charity – imagine the impact, scope, and reach of all of us together.

Corporations and the wealthy that are willing to contribute to our much needed programs must be allowed to do so at current rates if not at higher ones.  Across the country, charities that provide meals, shelter, hospital services and the like are now shuttered due to already existing funding shortages.  With all due respect, this bill would be cutting the last lifeline to many of us in the non-profit sector.  Is this not contrary to the president’s message asks the “haves” to help provide for the “have nots”?  That is philanthropy – those with funds fund those without.

The argument that the jobs bill will put more people to work and therefore will generate more funding for charities is a faulty one.  These temporary infrastructure jobs will indeed provide a helping hand to those who are drowning but they will not generate the type of financial security that can tolerate charitable contributions.

I ask President Obama not to deprive those that depend upon the non-for-profit sector for their survival and not to not rob the philanthropic community to pay America’s debts.

We live in a time where neither Peter nor Paul has anything else to spare.

Ask Obama to Save the Whales - Decision Due in 60 Days

UPDATE: Iceland to resume fin whaling in June 2013. Obama considered sanctions but did not, in the end, impose any.

 
Iceland and Norway are the only two countries in the world that continue to permit commercial whaling. Much of the meat is either sent to Japan for human consumption or fed to tourists as a novelty. (Japan is still permitted to hunt whales for "scientific purposes", though the meat is sold for food.) There is no humane way to kill whales at sea and since 2006 (when Iceland resumed commercial whaling) hundreds of endangered fin whales and minke whales have been killed.

Icelandic Whale - Google Images

A few days ago, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and the U.S. Department of Commerce formally declared that Iceland is undermining the effectiveness of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) by hunting whales in defiance of the IWC’s global ban on commercial whaling. As a result of this declaration, President Obama now has 60 days to decide whether to impose economic penalties and/or trade sanctions against Iceland pursuant to legislation known as the ‘Pelly Amendment’. Diplomatic negotiations and disapproval of other countries have so far failed to stop this practice.

Additionally, conservationists and animal welfare supporters are urging tourists to boycott Iceland and its whale watching excursions. Tourism is one of the countries primary revenue generators as visitors go whale watching and, in some instances, back to town to sample whale meat!  Arni Gunnarsson, the chairperson of the Icelandic Travel Industry Association, who is of the position that whale hunting is not profitable and taints Iceland's' global reputation, further stated in support of stopping the cruel behavior, stated: "It's simple: you get more revenues out of watching the whales than out of hunting them." 

Doing the right thing is in itself its just reward, and, in this case, it pays better.

President Obama has 60 days to make a decision. Please contact him  and urge him to protect whales and sanction Iceland.

Like Kids, Pets, Africa? There’s a Charity for That!

I hate to sound like a broken record - but - everybody isn't qualified to run a charity. It is not necessary to start your own corporation to accomplish something or to steer funding to a specific need. At least once a day I receive a call from someone who wants to start a charity to fulfill some personal need or to accomplish a specific project. Others feel they need to do so to appear philanthropic or to use celebrity power to create awareness and large sums for a righteous cause. However, many a well-intentioned philanthropist lacks the skills and resources to actually execute the charitable mission and properly oversee the workings of the enterprise. The result is that vast expenditures are made for startup needs, advisers, managers and the like. Since often the necessary expertise and the time to monitor the hired expert is lacking, things often go wrong and the funds don't make it to the target recipients.

As there can be a lot of profit in the not-for-profit sector, there is great opportunity for the unscrupulous and the greedy. We are a predominantly generous and empathetic people who are exposed to a zillion pieces of information daily with very little time to research everything we see and hear. Consequently, we are easily ripped off and misled while trying to help others.

In the last two weeks it was reported that Madonna's charity had "issues” and her promised new school would not be built, Kanye West's foundation funds were not making it to the needy, the Dodgers had to repay their foundation funds that were spent improperly, and that Three Cups of Tea author Greg Mortenson might be a fraud. (In fact 60 Minutes reported that even President Obama donated a hundred thousand dollars of his Nobel Peace Prize award to one of Mortenson's projects.)  
The consequences are the same whether the donations are stolen or mismanaged. Those who need the help don't get it.

The solution is simple. Research reputable existing charities and locate those that serve the constituency that you wish to help. Determine if that charity provides the specific service that you wish to fund. Then donate specifically to that program. The funds saved on startup costs, overhead expenses, and consultants can be used to create or enhance a program within an existing charity. You can even name your favorite program for a significant contribution.

The point is that more of each dollar will make it to the needy.  Isn't that better?

Update to Military Families Forced to Leave Pets Behind in Japan

Immediately following reports of, and my blog post commenting on, the inability of military families to evacuate on government flights with their pets, an official government document, updated as of the evening of March 21st, was sent to me. This document stated that families could bring a maximum of 2 pets, of a certain type, on certain flights under certain conditions or they could finance their own evacuation.  While this is better than nothing it is a far cry from perfect and still pointed to the need for a closer look into and reform of evacuation and disaster preparedness issues. The power of the human animal bond cannot be ignored or minimized.

As such, I addressed these issues in an op-ed piece that was published today in the Washington Times which I would like to share with you.  http://bit.ly/eOQrP7

Military Families Forced to Leave Pets Behind in Japan

It is being reported that families of military members stationed in Japan must leave their pets behind if they wish to evacuate the country on government run flights. http://ow.ly/4j8YB The families were also told that those pets would then be euthanized. Once again, as witnessed during Hurricane Katrina, a forced choice to leave without a family member or stay in harm's way has further traumatized those already suffering through the violence of an earthquake, a tsunami and the fear of radiation poisoning. This decision by the military is truly shocking and contrary to the lessons learned from prior disasters.

The world watched in horror as people chose to drown rather than abandon their pets in New Orleans. Consequently, FEMA added pet evacuation strategies to their checklists, and states, like California, passed laws mandating that pets be considered in disaster planning.  Yet our military is asking their families to kill their pets as a condition of being rescued. Is the military asking a parent to explain to a child why his or her puppy and kitten can't come on the rescue plane? Is the military telling those who are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for their country that their country will not help them unless they kill their dog? Is this the same military, deployed to assist in national disasters, which saw people essentially commit suicide when confronted with this choice before that forgot the enormous strength of the human animal bond?

President Obama: As commander in chief, please countermand this order. If you are going to rescue people -do it - without torturing them in the process. Crate the small pets, muzzle the large ones and just get it done. http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact

Give the Sharks an XMAS Gift-.Ask Obama to Sign Shark Conservation Act

The Shark Conservation Act of 2010 will ban the practice of shark finning, which involves catching sharks, cutting off their fins, and releasing them alive into the water to suffer a slow painful drowning death. All for shark fin soup and other "delicacies". This act would close a loophole that banned the practice in the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico in earlier 2000 legislation, but omitted the Pacific Ocean. It also will require that boats in  United States waters keep the entire shark carcass intact.

Besides the cruelty issue, shark populations are dangerously dwindling which is itself bad enough, but worse, when you consider that as scavenger fish, they are responsible for and essential to maintaining a thriving and clean ocean. As goes the shark, so goes other marine life.

For more information see http://www.stopsharkfinning.net/index.htm and please - take a moment to ask President Obama to sign the Act. http://www.emailthepresident.com/  It is a little effort for us to email - but it means the world to the sharks. Thank you.

Cat and Dog Fur Apparel Must Be Labeled

About 10 years ago, we discovered that some ski boots were lined with dog fur and sold by a chain of sporting good stores. Although legal across the United States, selling those boots in California violated a section of the Penal Code which makes it a misdemeanor to sell, buy, possess, give away or import a dog or cat pelt. Additionally, there was no label disclosing the type of fur used in the boot.  We successfully prosecuted the stores. A few years ago, we seized imported toys trimmed with dog and cat fur that were being sold at swap meets, also unlabeled, and again we prosecuted under the same section. Unfortunately, these vendors were allowed to sell these products in other states as there was no pelt law, and, because of the small amount of trim, they were not required to disclose on the labels that they were made of dog or cat fur.

President Obama just signed The Truth in Fur Labeling Act  which now requires a label to disclose what the fur is - even if the value is minor.

Therefore-it is now federal law to disclose -but still illegal to deal in dog and cat fur in California, even if properly labeled.

We asked - now they have to tell.